[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DB7EOS7AC5SZ.ZJRH3IRQ2ZMU@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2025 11:10:50 +0200
From: "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org>
To: "Andreas Hindborg" <a.hindborg@...nel.org>
Cc: "Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@...nel.org>, "Alex Gaynor"
<alex.gaynor@...il.com>, "Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com>, "Gary Guo"
<gary@...yguo.net>, Björn Roy Baron
<bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, "Masahiro
Yamada" <masahiroy@...nel.org>, "Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@...nel.org>,
"Luis Chamberlain" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, "Danilo Krummrich"
<dakr@...nel.org>, "Nicolas Schier" <nicolas.schier@...ux.dev>, "Trevor
Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>, "Adam Bratschi-Kaye" <ark.email@...il.com>,
<rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>, "Petr Pavlu" <petr.pavlu@...e.com>, "Sami
Tolvanen" <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, "Daniel Gomez" <da.gomez@...sung.com>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona.vetter@...ll.ch>, "Greg KH"
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Fiona Behrens" <me@...enk.dev>, "Daniel
Almeida" <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>, <linux-modules@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 1/7] rust: sync: add `SetOnce`
On Wed Jul 9, 2025 at 10:56 AM CEST, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
> "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org> writes:
>
>> On Tue Jul 8, 2025 at 3:06 PM CEST, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
>>> "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org> writes:
>>>> On Mon Jul 7, 2025 at 3:29 PM CEST, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync.rs b/rust/kernel/sync.rs
>>>>> index 81e3a806e57e2..13e6bc7fa87ac 100644
>>>>> --- a/rust/kernel/sync.rs
>>>>> +++ b/rust/kernel/sync.rs
>>>>> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
>>>>> mod locked_by;
>>>>> pub mod poll;
>>>>> pub mod rcu;
>>>>> +mod set_once;
>>>>
>>>> I would have named this `once`.
>>>
>>> So module `once` and struct `SetOnce`? Struct name `Once` would lead
>>> thoughts to `std::sync::Once`, which is a different thing.
>>
>> Hmm I thought that `Once` and `SetOnce` would live in the same module,
>> but if they don't then I think it's better to keep the `set_once`
>> module as-is.
>
> I guess they could live together. I was thinking a module for each. We
> can always move it, the module name is not part of a public API.
>
> Let's go with `set_once` for now and we can change it later, if we
> decide it is for the better?
Sure.
---
Cheers,
Benno
Powered by blists - more mailing lists